Legend:

where all of the type annotations here are optional, and can be '''no less restrictive''' than the corresponding type signatures provided at the definition site, if provided (whether that be in that file's own code, or imported from another file).

22

22

23

This would have non-trivial interaction with -fno-warn-missing-signatures, and consequently, with [http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/2526 ticket #2526].

23

This would have non-trivial interaction with -fno-warn-missing-signatures, and consequently, with #2526.

24

24

There may also be non-trivial interaction with GADTs, if we allow exported constructors to be annotated with a type signature.

25

25

26

This idea was vaguely referenced by [http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/1404 ticket #1404], to which igloo responded:

26

This idea was vaguely referenced by #1404, to which igloo responded:

27

27

28

28

"Type sigs in export lists might be nice, as some people seem to like giving them as comments which then get out of sync with the actual types."